For your info, I'm not getting money for what' I'm setting up with other guys at OpenStreetMap France.
I'm not alone behind all the stuff we're running, coding, hosting on OSM-FR donated servers.

We're a small team of a dozen of volunteers taking care of a dozen of servers all donated to us (some old ones, some brand new). Hosting is also donated in different places (universities, companies, etc).

Regarding the money we've been able to collect, a large part of it has been donated to us for humanitarian and social development goals and comes from the "Fondation de France".

We also collected some money this year thanks to our 2nd State Of The Map (in april) which will be used to run our organization.

OSM-FR has no paid employee.

Helping the core OSMF funding/hosting is something we would really like to happen, working closer together.
We're quite new organisation (a little more than 2 years) and still in the process of organizing ourself better... trying to cope with fast OSM adoption that is happening here thanks to so many government and local authority contacts we've established in the past years.

Our last move creating "BANO" (nationwide open address database) should even accelerate all this !

"Our goal is to feature OpenStreetMap to help grow the community - attribution plays a key role in this"

So... why hide the attribution behind a tiny almost invisible icon ?

When there's enough space on the map, it is against the spirit of ODbL (not "reasonably calculated") to require a user action to access attribution details.

Just as a reminder:

4.3 Notice for using output (Contents). Creating and Using a Produced Work does not require the notice in Section 4.2. However, if you Publicly Use a Produced Work, You must include a notice associated with the Produced Work reasonably calculated to make any Person that uses, views, accesses, interacts with, or is otherwise exposed to the Produced Work aware that Content was obtained from the Database, Derivative Database, or the Database as part of a Collective Database, and that it is available under this License.

Please update your post to provide a valid recommendation. Keeping it like this creates unnecessary confusion.

Will be even better with proper (read visible) attribution... those icons are a fallback when there is not enough space for attribution (mobile screens for example) otherwise the requirement is clear on http://osm.org/copyright

I can agree on some parts of this post and disagree on others, but some of the examples you're using are looking wrong to me.

For example Wheelmap can display OSM POI on whatever basemap, there is no data mix in the process, no problem with ODbL.

The problem we're facing is how to be more open (allowing a mix with public domain datasets) and at the same time prevent massive use of OSM data in non open ways (Google, Apple, etc).

The default licence should keep a share-alike condition, but at the same time on a dataset per dataset basis we should be able to remove that condition when there is a real benefit to the project which in my point of view is not the case in general.

In France we have 2 licence trends in opendata: with or without share-alike.

We're promoting share-alike as it is a benefit for the commons and a virtuous circle.

Ok, this may not fit some business models, but while OSM allows commercial use of the project data, this its not the goal of the project and should become one.
Share-alike has not been causing the projet a problem see the large community, the increasing number of reuses, the existing business opportunities around OSM.

OSM value is in its community spending millions of hours creating and improving the data, not in the data themselves. As a contributor, except under some circumstances, I want a guarantee that my work will never be captured, privatized and share-alike is that guarantee.